quote:

Originally posted by psychoABN:

quote:

Originally posted by PhoenixDark:
What Keg either didn't notice (or hopes we don't) is that the pay caps apply ONLY TO COMPANIES THAT HAVE RECIEVED TARP (i.e. Federal Bailout) funds - companies like AIG who've already shown that they have no shame in handing out hundred million dollar bonuses to executives who've driven the company into the ground. What I'd like to know is, what's the constitutional authority to set up this oversight...

As a taxpayer, I don't want my share of the bailout funds going to pay some dumbazz executive or high level manager an outrageous salary for doing a crappy job.

Companies that didn't receive TARP funds are free to pay their employees whatever they like as long as it's above minimum wage.

You honestly didn't think President Obama was going to pull a Bush and give away hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars to Corporate America with no accountability did you?

What you fail to mention is that not all of the comapnies wanted to take TARP funds, but were strong-armed into taking the money. Several companies have tried to pay back the TARP money and were told by the very competent Treasury Secretary "Uhhhhh......no." Why wouldn't the adminstration allow the money to be paid back? That's money that goes back into the Treasury. Maybe it's a control issue...and from this recent development, it would seem that is the case.

quote:

Originally posted by rayld2:

quote:

Originally posted by psychoABN:

quote:

Originally posted by PhoenixDark:
What Keg either didn't notice (or hopes we don't) is that the pay caps apply ONLY TO COMPANIES THAT HAVE RECIEVED TARP (i.e. Federal Bailout) funds - companies like AIG who've already shown that they have no shame in handing out hundred million dollar bonuses to executives who've driven the company into the ground. What I'd like to know is, what's the constitutional authority to set up this oversight...

As a taxpayer, I don't want my share of the bailout funds going to pay some dumbazz executive or high level manager an outrageous salary for doing a crappy job.

Companies that didn't receive TARP funds are free to pay their employees whatever they like as long as it's above minimum wage.

You honestly didn't think President Obama was going to pull a Bush and give away hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars to Corporate America with no accountability did you?

What you fail to mention is that not all of the comapnies wanted to take TARP funds, but were strong-armed into taking the money. Several companies have tried to pay back the TARP money and were told by the very competent Treasury Secretary "Uhhhhh......no." Why wouldn't the adminstration allow the money to be paid back? That's money that goes back into the Treasury. Maybe it's a control issue...and from this recent development, it would seem that is the case.

psychoABN Have you bothered to look at how those compnaies were going to fund the payback, I did so through my financial advisor? They would have placed the companies in a position to fail and/or need to be bailed out again using accounting tricks and borrowing (bad) in addition to selling assets and stock (maybe Ok). IMO the primary reason the top management of these companies want to pay back NOW (and a couple have even been honest enough to say so) is to get control of their compensation again (ie so management can give themselves big bonuses).

quote:

Originally posted by psychoABN:
TARP went from being loans that would be paid back with interest, to being converted to prefered stock, which pay dividends but offers the stockholder(the government)no vote as a shareholder, and will progress to common stock where not only does the shareholder receive dividends, but also gets a vote...



Hmmmm, hasn't something different yet also very similar happened recently in a different, yet also economically significant industry? Anyone?

Anyone?

Bueller?

Bueller?

quote:

Originally posted by psychoABN:

quote:

It's just a shame that Bush didn't have the cajones to demand the same level of accountability out of these companies when he was handing out the first $700 billion in bailout funds.

I don't know if you realize it yet, but we're deep enough into this administration that we're at the point where the economy is President Obama's baby...The only people that still believe the "Blame Bush" rhetoric are those that have Kool-Ade mustachios.

quote:

Originally posted by rayld2:

quote:

Originally posted by psychoABN:
TARP went from being loans that would be paid back with interest, to being converted to prefered stock, which pay dividends but offers the stockholder(the government)no vote as a shareholder, and will progress to common stock where not only does the shareholder receive dividends, but also gets a vote...



Hmmmm, hasn't something different yet also very similar happened recently in a different, yet also economically significant industry? Anyone?

Anyone?

Bueller?

Bueller?

psychoABN now that you repeated someone talking points try pointing out why the COMPANY management and those owed money by the company would WANT the money to change from loan to preferred stock to common stock. Or do you even understand what is happening well enough to know why?
Hint think about the company being able to get additonal PRIVATE funding and investment and who would get money if the company fails.

quote:

Originally posted by rayld2:

quote:

Originally posted by psychoABN:

quote:

It's just a shame that Bush didn't have the cajones to demand the same level of accountability out of these companies when he was handing out the first $700 billion in bailout funds.

I don't know if you realize it yet, but we're deep enough into this administration that we're at the point where the economy is President Obama's baby...The only people that still believe the "Blame Bush" rhetoric are those that have Kool-Ade mustachios.

Don't know if you realise it but the first Obama admin budget does NOT start until OCTOBER. We are still using the last Bush admin budget.

quote:

Originally posted by psychoABN:

quote:

Originally posted by rayld2:

quote:

Originally posted by psychoABN:
TARP went from being loans that would be paid back with interest, to being converted to prefered stock, which pay dividends but offers the stockholder(the government)no vote as a shareholder, and will progress to common stock where not only does the shareholder receive dividends, but also gets a vote...



Hmmmm, hasn't something different yet also very similar happened recently in a different, yet also economically significant industry? Anyone?

Anyone?

Bueller?

Bueller?

psychoABN now that you repeated someone talking points try pointing out why the COMPANY management and those owed money by the company would WANT the money to change from loan to preferred stock to common stock. Or do you even understand what is happening well enough to know why?
Hint think about the company being able to get additonal PRIVATE funding and investment and who would get money if the company fails.

You mean that the TARP money was privately funded? Gee, I didn't know that...and I don't know what the hell you're talking about. It may make sense to you, who knows...

I'm pretty darned sure that these TARP companies don't really want the government holding common stock.

quote:

Originally posted by PhoenixDark:
What Keg either didn't notice (or hopes we don't) is that the pay caps apply ONLY TO COMPANIES THAT HAVE RECIEVED TARP (i.e. Federal Bailout) funds - companies like AIG who've already shown that they have no shame in handing out hundred million dollar bonuses to executives who've driven the company into the ground.

As a taxpayer, I don't want my share of the bailout funds going to pay some dumbazz executive or high level manager an outrageous salary for doing a crappy job.

Companies that didn't receive TARP funds are free to pay their employees whatever they like as long as it's above minimum wage.

You honestly didn't think President Obama was going to pull a Bush and give away hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars to Corporate America with no accountability did you?

quote:

Originally posted by rayld2:

quote:

Originally posted by psychoABN:

quote:

Originally posted by rayld2:

quote:

Originally posted by psychoABN:
TARP went from being loans that would be paid back with interest, to being converted to prefered stock, which pay dividends but offers the stockholder(the government)no vote as a shareholder, and will progress to common stock where not only does the shareholder receive dividends, but also gets a vote...



Hmmmm, hasn't something different yet also very similar happened recently in a different, yet also economically significant industry? Anyone?

Anyone?

Bueller?

Bueller?

psychoABN now that you repeated someone talking points try pointing out why the COMPANY management and those owed money by the company would WANT the money to change from loan to preferred stock to common stock. Or do you even understand what is happening well enough to know why?
Hint think about the company being able to get additonal PRIVATE funding and investment and who would get money if the company fails.

You mean that the TARP money was privately funded? Gee, I didn't know that...and I don't know what the hell you're talking about. It may make sense to you, who knows...

I'm pretty darned sure that these TARP companies don't really want the government holding common stock.

psychoABN this post shows that you either DO NOT understand the way stocks work or you are deliberately twisting things since NO ONE said "TARP money was privately funded" and you stated "TARP companies don't really want the government holding common stock" when I talked about Company Management and those owed money by the company.

quote:

(CNN) -- South Carolina's Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Gov. Mark Sanford must accept $700 million in federal stimulus money, ending the only formal effort by a governor to reject funding intended to jump-start an ailing economy.

Source: "http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/06/04/south.carolina.sanford.stimulus/index.html"

"The World's Finest"

quote:

Originally posted by psychoABN:

quote:

Originally posted by rayld2:

quote:

Originally posted by psychoABN:

quote:

Originally posted by rayld2:

quote:

Originally posted by psychoABN:
TARP went from being loans that would be paid back with interest, to being converted to prefered stock, which pay dividends but offers the stockholder(the government)no vote as a shareholder, and will progress to common stock where not only does the shareholder receive dividends, but also gets a vote...



Hmmmm, hasn't something different yet also very similar happened recently in a different, yet also economically significant industry? Anyone?

Anyone?

Bueller?

Bueller?

psychoABN now that you repeated someone talking points try pointing out why the COMPANY management and those owed money by the company would WANT the money to change from loan to preferred stock to common stock. Or do you even understand what is happening well enough to know why?
Hint think about the company being able to get additonal PRIVATE funding and investment and who would get money if the company fails.

You mean that the TARP money was privately funded? Gee, I didn't know that...and I don't know what the hell you're talking about. It may make sense to you, who knows...

I'm pretty darned sure that these TARP companies don't really want the government holding common stock.

psychoABN this post shows that you either DO NOT understand the way stocks work or you are deliberately twisting things since NO ONE said "TARP money was privately funded" and you stated "TARP companies don't really want the government holding common stock" when I talked about Company Management and those owed money by the company.

rayld2(is that how we're doing this?)I give up, you are the most intelligent of all, how dare I even try.....

I totally forgot. Since you're an expert on everything else, why not this too....

Seriously, though...I still don't know what the hell you're talking about.

quote:

Originally posted by Kegler300:
South Carolina Governor must accept TARP funds court rules.

quote:

(CNN) -- South Carolina's Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Gov. Mark Sanford must accept $700 million in federal stimulus money, ending the only formal effort by a governor to reject funding intended to jump-start an ailing economy.

Source: "http://www.cnn.com/2009/
POLITICS/06/04/south.carolina.sanford.stimulus/index.html"

quote:

the Republican-controlled legislature passed a budget that included the funds.

Students and education officials in South Carolina filed lawsuits demanding that the governor take the money. Sanford tried to have those suits merged and heard in federal court.

On Monday, however, a federal judge rejected that effort, and said that the South Carolina Supreme Court must decide what to do.

In its ruling, the state's highest court said the legislature, not Sanford, has the power to decide whether to accept the federal stimulus money.

quote:

Originally posted by rayld2:

quote:

Originally posted by Kegler300:
South Carolina Governor must accept TARP funds court rules.

quote:

(CNN) -- South Carolina's Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Gov. Mark Sanford must accept $700 million in federal stimulus money, ending the only formal effort by a governor to reject funding intended to jump-start an ailing economy.

Source: "http://www.cnn.com/2009/
POLITICS/06/04/south.carolina.sanford.stimulus/index.html"

Kegler300 you forgot to mention that it was the Republican-controlled legislature that forced him to take the funds the court just ruled that they had the power to do so. IMo Gov. Mark Sanford was just trying to position himself for getting the Repub Presidential nomination at the expense of the people in his state.

quote:

the Republican-controlled legislature passed a budget that included the funds.

Students and education officials in South Carolina filed lawsuits demanding that the governor take the money. Sanford tried to have those suits merged and heard in federal court.

On Monday, however, a federal judge rejected that effort, and said that the South Carolina Supreme Court must decide what to do.

In its ruling, the state's highest court said the legislature, not Sanford, has the power to decide whether to accept the federal stimulus money.

quote:

Originally posted by GunnyRet03:

quote:

Originally posted by rayld2:

quote:

Originally posted by Kegler300:
South Carolina Governor must accept TARP funds court rules.

quote:

(CNN) -- South Carolina's Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Gov. Mark Sanford must accept $700 million in federal stimulus money, ending the only formal effort by a governor to reject funding intended to jump-start an ailing economy.

Source: "http://www.cnn.com/2009/
POLITICS/06/04/south.carolina.
sanford.stimulus/index.html"

Kegler300 you forgot to mention that it was the Republican-controlled legislature that forced him to take the funds the court just ruled that they had the power to do so. IMo Gov. Mark Sanford was just trying to position himself for getting the Repub Presidential nomination at the expense of the people in his state.

quote:

the Republican-controlled legislature passed a budget that included the funds.

Students and education officials in South Carolina filed lawsuits demanding that the governor take the money. Sanford tried to have those suits merged and heard in federal court.

On Monday, however, a federal judge rejected that effort, and said that the South Carolina Supreme Court must decide what to do.

In its ruling, the state's highest court said the legislature, not Sanford, has the power to decide whether to accept the federal stimulus money.

At the expense of the state yeh get money that we dont want. Most people here dont want it. And sanford during his tenure has been trying to stop spending.

quote:

Originally posted by rayld2:

quote:

Originally posted by GunnyRet03:

quote:

Originally posted by rayld2:

quote:

Originally posted by Kegler300:
South Carolina Governor must accept TARP funds court rules.

quote:

(CNN) -- South Carolina's Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Gov. Mark Sanford must accept $700 million in federal stimulus money, ending the only formal effort by a governor to reject funding intended to jump-start an ailing economy.

Source: "http://www.cnn.com/2009/
POLITICS/06/04/south.carolina.
sanford.stimulus/index.html"

Kegler300 you forgot to mention that it was the Republican-controlled legislature that forced him to take the funds the court just ruled that they had the power to do so. IMo Gov. Mark Sanford was just trying to position himself for getting the Repub Presidential nomination at the expense of the people in his state.

quote:

the Republican-controlled legislature passed a budget that included the funds.

Students and education officials in South Carolina filed lawsuits demanding that the governor take the money. Sanford tried to have those suits merged and heard in federal court.

On Monday, however, a federal judge rejected that effort, and said that the South Carolina Supreme Court must decide what to do.

In its ruling, the state's highest court said the legislature, not Sanford, has the power to decide whether to accept the federal stimulus money.

At the expense of the state yeh get money that we dont want. Most people here dont want it. And sanford during his tenure has been trying to stop spending.

Note it was the Republican-controlled STATE legislature that forced him to take the funds

quote:

Originally posted by rayld2:

quote:

Originally posted by psychoABN:

quote:

Originally posted by rayld2:

quote:

Originally posted by psychoABN:

quote:

Originally posted by rayld2:

quote:

Originally posted by psychoABN:
TARP went from being loans that would be paid back with interest, to being converted to prefered stock, which pay dividends but offers the stockholder(the government)no vote as a shareholder, and will progress to common stock where not only does the shareholder receive dividends, but also gets a vote...



Hmmmm, hasn't something different yet also very similar happened recently in a different, yet also economically significant industry? Anyone?

Anyone?

Bueller?

Bueller?

psychoABN now that you repeated someone talking points try pointing out why the COMPANY management and those owed money by the company would WANT the money to change from loan to preferred stock to common stock. Or do you even understand what is happening well enough to know why?
Hint think about the company being able to get additonal PRIVATE funding and investment and who would get money if the company fails.

You mean that the TARP money was privately funded? Gee, I didn't know that...and I don't know what the hell you're talking about. It may make sense to you, who knows...

I'm pretty darned sure that these TARP companies don't really want the government holding common stock.

psychoABN this post shows that you either DO NOT understand the way stocks work or you are deliberately twisting things since NO ONE said "TARP money was privately funded" and you stated "TARP companies don't really want the government holding common stock" when I talked about Company Management and those owed money by the company.

rayld2(is that how we're doing this?)I give up, you are the most intelligent of all, how dare I even try.....

I totally forgot. Since you're an expert on everything else, why not this too....

Seriously, though...I still don't know what the hell you're talking about.

Ok. If you check on the order of who gets money during a bankrupcy it might make more sense to you. There are several categories. To way over simplify it there is secured debt, unsecured debt (for example suppliers), prefered stock holders and common stock holders (leaves out a LOT of groups). Secured debt will get money from sale of assets used to secure the debt. Unsecured debt and preferred stockholders get a higher priority on money than common stockholders. This means that by the government switching to common stock they make it easier for the company management to get private funding and to convince suppliers to sell to them because it shifts more of the risk of loss to the government.